The process of survival of the fittest is so brutal, just around one in ten to one in a hundred of those born live to produce offspring. This ratio of mutations yields adequate scope for the selection of any variation needed in order to alter the species so as to bring the species into balance with changing conditions. This will be much more simple and certain if we regard how slow land-surfaces and climates endure permanent changes. Such are the type of modifications that create and compel modifications, first, most likely, in the distribution, and subsequently in the structure and habits of species.

We can extrapolate, therefore, this utterly essential conclusion from the facts: if natural selection can and does uphold each continually altering species in certain adaptation to an unchanging environment, that it preserves the fixity of its regular condition. Most every dissenter agrees with this viewpoint. In a slowly shifting environment, the same power should unavoidably bring about some correlated change is needed for the well-being and perpetual survival of the different species that are subjected to those changed conditions.

I won’t include a additional consideration of the dissents declared by critics of the theory. All of these have, at this point, been fully covered by myself and others who study evolutionary theory. Some of these writers have been discussed in review articles such as the works I am currently posting. The word extinction is a stronger word than natural selection, but in point of fact what we truly are talking about is those maladapted species who perish while those more adapted survive.

The evolution creationism controversy debate has heightened in recent years, and especially in the last 10. It is creating an unfortunate deflection from our task of the further cultivation of knowledge, theory and reason within the field of evolutionary biology. We in science are no doubt crossed by this, and perhaps we find as a release valve for this frustration a periodic enjoyment of evolution humor on the sometimes misguided argument regarding evolution, creationism and intelligent design.